Set Viewport Scale

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations only provide destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses two important non-obvious behaviors: annotative entities are not resized, and the layout's main viewport is refused. Missing explicit error/refusal semantics is a minor gap, but the description adds substantial context beyond the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core action. The two qualifying sentences each add unique, non-redundant constraints, making every sentence earn its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple two-parameter schema, low annotation coverage, and presence of an output schema, the description covers the important edge cases: annotative behavior and the main viewport refusal. It is sufficient for correct invocation, though explicit refusal/error behavior would be a minor improvement.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and already documents both parameters with useful examples and source guidance. The description adds the view-height mechanism, which is helpful but not essential; the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Rescale a viewport') and adds precise scope via 'by adjusting its view height' and 'Geometric scale only'. This distinguishes it from related viewport tools like viewport_lock and viewport_delete, and from entity_scale.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this should be used for setting a drafting scale on a layout viewport and explicitly warns about the main viewport exception. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or what to use for annotative scaling, leaving usage context somewhat implied.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.